As Children’s Freedom Has Declined, So Has Their Creativity

If anything makes Americans stand tall internationally it is creativity. “American ingenuity” is admired everywhere. We are not the richest country (at least not as measured by smallest percentage in poverty), nor the healthiest (far from it), nor the country whose kids score highest on standardized tests (despite our politicians’ misguided intentions to get us there), but we are the most inventive country. We are the great innovators, specialists in figuring out new ways of doing things and new things to do. Perhaps this derives from our frontier beginnings, or from our unique form of democracy with its emphasis on individual freedom and respect for nonconformity. In the business world as well as in academia and the arts and elsewhere, creativity is our number one asset. In a recent IBM poll, 1,500 CEOs acknowledged this when they identified creativity as the best predictor of future success.[1]

It is sobering, therefore, to read Kyung Hee Kim’s recent research report documenting a continuous decline in creativity among American schoolchildren over the last two or three decades.[2]

Kim, who is a professor of education at the College of William and Mary, analyzed scores on a battery of measures of creativity—called the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT)—collected from normative samples of schoolchildren in kindergarten through twelfth grade over several decades. According to Kim’s analyses, the scores on these tests at all grade levels began to decline somewhere between 1984 and 1990 and have continued to decline ever since. The drops in scores are highly significant statistically and in some cases very large. In Kim’s words, the data indicate that “children have become less emotionally expressive, less energetic, less talkative and verbally expressive, less humorous, less imaginative, less unconventional, less lively and passionate, less perceptive, less apt to connect seemingly irrelevant things, less synthesizing, and less likely to see things from a different angle.”

According to Kim’s research, all aspects of creativity have declined, but the biggest decline is in the measure called Creative Elaboration, which assesses the ability to take a particular idea and expand on it in an interesting and novel way. Between 1984 and 2008, the average Elaboration score on the TTCT, for every age group from kindergarten through 12th grade, fell by more than 1 standard deviation. Stated differently, this means that more than 85% of children in 2008 scored lower on this measure than did the average child in 1984. Yikes.

You might wonder how creativity can be assessed. By definition, any test with questions that have just one right answer or one correct pathway to solution is not a test of creativity. The Torrance Tests were developed by E. Paul Torrance in the late 1950s, when he was an education professor at the University of Minnesota. During the immediate post-Sputnik period, the U.S. government was concerned with identifying and fostering giftedness among American schoolchildren, so as to catch up with the Russians (whom we mistakenly thought were ahead of us in scientific innovation).

While most of Torrance’s colleagues focused on standard measures of intelligence as a path toward doing this, Torrance chose to focus on creativity. His prior work with fighter pilots in the Air Force had convinced him that creativity is the central variable underlying personal achievement and ability to adapt to unusual conditions.[3] He set about developing a test in which people are presented with various kinds of stimuli and are asked to do something with them that is interesting and novel—that is, creative. The eventual result was the set of tests that now bear his name. In the most often used of these tests, the stimuli are marks on paper--such as a squiggly line or a set of parallel lines and circles—and the task is to make drawings that incorporate and expand on those stimuli. The drawings are scored according to the degree to which they include such qualities as originality, meaningfulness, and humor.

The best evidence that the Torrance Tests really do measure creative potential come from longitudinal research showing strong, statistically significant correlations between childhood scores on the TTCT and subsequent real-world achievements.[4] As the authors of one article commenting on these results put it, high scorers “tallied more books, dances, radio shows, art exhibits, software programs, advertising campaigns, hardware innovations, music compositions, public policies (written or implemented), leadership positions, invited lectures, and buildings designed” than did those who scored lower.[5]

Indeed, the TTCT seems to be the best predictor of lifetime achievement that has yet been invented. It is a better predictor than IQ, high-school grades, or peer judgments of who will achieve the most.[6] The correlation coefficients found between childhood TTCT scores and real-world adult creative achievements have ranged from a low of about .25 to a high of about .60, depending on which tests are included and how adult creative achievements are assessed.[6]

So, the decline in TTCT scores among school-aged children indeed does appear to be cause for concern. Kim herself calls it the “creativity crisis,” and that term has been picked up in a number of articles in popular magazines.

Well, surprise, surprise. For several decades we as a society have been suppressing children’s freedom to ever-greater extents, and now we find that their creativity is declining.

Creativity is nurtured by freedom and stifled by the continuous monitoring, evaluation, adult-direction, and pressure to conform that restrict children’s lives today. In the real world few questions have one right answer, few problems have one right solution; that’s why creativity is crucial to success in the real world. But more and more we are subjecting children to an educational system that assumes one right answer to every question and one correct solution to every problem, a system that punishes children (and their teachers too) for daring to try different routes. We are also, as I documented in a previous essay, increasingly depriving children of free time outside of school to play, explore, be bored, overcome boredom, fail, overcome failure—that is, to do all that they must do in order to develop their full creative potential.

In the next essay in this series, I will present research evidence that creativity really does bloom in the soil of freedom and die in the hands of overdirective, overprotective, overjudgmental teachers and parents.

----------

And now, what are your thoughts on all this? In your experience, what fosters or inhibits creativity? Have you seen evidence that either corroborates or counters Kyung Kim’s findings of a decline in creativity or the suggestion that current schooling practices and other restrictions on children’s freedom inhibit children’s creative development?

As always, I prefer if you post your comments and questions here rather than send them to me by private email. By putting them here, you share with other readers, not just with me. I read all comments and try to respond to all serious questions. Often, other readers whose answers are better than mine respond to posted questions. Of course, if you have something to say that truly applies only to you and me, then send me an email.

I have been troubled by stifling creativity in children for a long time. When my son was in kindergarten (he's 32 now), his teacher (a long-time teacher) told me she noticed since the free period was removed from the children's curriculum (as dictated by the state), that the children no longer had time to themselves to create and play. She, and I, was very upset over this and I could see a future where creativity in the U.S. declined. Guess this prescient observation is correct.

I have been troubled by stifling creativity in children for a long time. When my son was in kindergarten (he's 32 now), his teacher (a long-time teacher) told me she noticed since the free period was removed from the children's curriculum (as dictated by the state), that the children no longer had time to themselves to create and play. She, and I, was very upset over this and I could see a future where creativity in the U.S. declined. Guess this prescient observation is correct.

Dr. Gray, your point about freedom and creativity is right on. I have been working with two action research groups of music and art teachers, K-12, since 2001 studying the effects of engaging the students more actively in their own learning. Students help shape not only their learning projects but also their learning goals, criteria, and rubrics. Using their rubrics, they assess themselves (with supportive feedback from teachers and/or peers) regularly during the project, both process and product, and reflect on what's working, what isn't, and what would improve it. The teachers thought that when they gave their students more freedom, chaos would result. Exactly the opposite occurred. Students took ownership of their learning and became self-initiated learners. This freedom, plus using this classic problem-solving process, nurtured their innate creativity that had been shrouded by years of 'staying inside the lines.' The next step is to ramp this up to 'infect' other educators and schools, not an easy job. (Wish us luck!)

Amabile found that five sure fire creativity and motivation killers are expected rewards (grades?), expected evaluation (tests), surveillance, time constraints, and competition. If you are like most of us, all of those factors were present in the classrooms we attended, even many of the arts classes, musical ensembles, etc. With the present ubiquitous testing, this condition is now on steroids! Little wonder about the present lack of creativity!

I am bit bit worried about all the comments in favor of home schooling. No, this is not an anti-home schooling rant, and certainly this has its place in the world.
However, isn't home schooling an alternative for those with a certain economic, educational and social level? Isn't it, therefore, an alternative which long term will fragment our society even more into the haves and have nots?
Why can't we all fight to upgrade our educational system for everyone, and not let the few opt out?

I love everyone's comments. I've been wondering lately what the impact will be of a whole generation of kids who have 2 working parents and are subject to daycare or nannies at a very young age. I wonder if creativity is something that would be lost? For me, my mom was home the whole time I was younger. Every one of my friends was the same way, always had the mom at home. Now that more women are entering the workforce even while kids are a young age, I am curious on the impact of a generation of kids with 2 working parents. Would really be interested in any studies.

I think there is as much variety in the content and quality of daycare facilities as there is among parents and schools. However, more affluent working parents have more daycare options available to them than the working poor or those of modest means. (This is partly balanced by Headstart, which is often a high-quality option available to low income parents, although it is more structured and has less variation.)

As a working parent, I looked for daycare providers who would provide options and resources that were difficult for me to provide at home. The kinds of questions generated in this discussion could be very helpful to working parents looking for the kind of daycare that will enhance, rather than stifle, children's creativity.

I'd be interested in studies, too. I am aware of some studies showing that children who go to preschool tend to have greater success in their later education. With respect to creativity vs. conformity, this might be statistically good news or bad. Still, I think it's important to note that a stay-at-home-mom is no more "the" answer than is homeschooling.

It seems pretty straightforward to me, the connection between testing and creativity. If you are going to try something new, either new to you or new to the world, you have to be willing to fail. And if you are ambitious, you have to be willing to fail big.

Kids lack this recklessness these days. Letting your algebra grade slip a little because you want to focus on getting good at the guitar just isn't a option in the high stakes environment fostered by the testing industry. Deciding to try using your non-dominant foot while playing soccer isn't going to win you any friends while you are getting over the hump of the learning curve.

Kids need to embrace failure as a requirement of success, and they need to be encouraged to take risks.

This is not surprising AT ALL. My fourth grade classes really struggle to invent creative stories. I read another article about how the brain starts to switch off certain "ways" of thinking-- creative being one of them-- as kids hit 10 years, if it hasn't been exercised by then. What does it say that at 10 years old, when a child is asked to invent a village of their own-- what would it look like-- they ask to look it up in a book first. They are not encouraged to be inventive, they are hyper concerned with being "right". This is something I have noticed and talked about for many years now, I'm so glad to hear more research being done!!

My son, who would be going into Grade 3 if I didn't homeschool him, yesterday found a certificate from his old school, which is about 8 months old. It was for 'good creative writing and handwriting'. He looked at it and said, "I loved creative writing but it was never what the teacher wanted". I would love to know what that meant! Isn't that the point of creative writing, that it's free? But instead of asking him, I quickly said, "Well, you don't need to worry about that any more. I love everything you write!".

In fact, since I started homeschooling him in February, he hasn't wanted to write a word, not even after he learned to type. I thought knowing how to type would overcome his dislike of writing because I know he disliked the physical act of writing. He's got lovely handwriting but is very slow. But this didn't work either, the typing was painfully slow too - because he wasn't practising. He just got into writing a few evenings ago (typing) and I was SO happy and encouraging but has stopped now. I wonder how much school put him off writing and stymied his creativity? Hopefully, he's young enough and I started homeschooling early enough, that he'll start again sometime. I don't want to force it though. If anyone has any ideas, please DO let me know with a 'comment reply' here :)

Hi Penny,
We homeschooled our kids until they went to high school (their choice). One of the best things we did was a writing club - for kids and parents. Everyone wrote something to bring to writing club. We started with moms and kids, meeting every other week, bringing our lunches along and then going on to an outdoor playtime. Then we invited the dads to join us, meeting with them once a month, followed by dessert (and sometimes also having a potluck dinner). It worked best with about 4 families. It made the adults humble - what do you want to write about and then read to everyone? and gave the kids some great models. There was no judging, no grading, just some kind reactions and/or questions after each person read. Part of the fun, invented by the kids, was coming up with silly ways to decide who was to read first (for example: start with the person with the longest hair...). When we first started, we had a list of some suggested topics: I remember one popular topic: if you were an animal, what would you be? But anyone could choose any topic! In fact, no one was required to write anything at all (some parents might have insisted... I myself struggled sometimes to come up with my own writing. My kids had the experience of attending writing club without bringing anything they'd written, and they didn't like it very much - I think they felt like they let down the others. We didn't even talk about it, they just made sure to write something for next time.

The other thing I've heard many homeschoolers say over the years is that kids who've been in school need time to just BE - to recover from the school experience and find their initiative again. So I'm offering advice: don't worry about your son! Be cool - don't praise his writing (read "Punished by Rewards"). He'll realize that writing is a tool that he wants to use. Model the behavior you want to encourage! Write about some of your favorite toys, or about your neighborhood, or about some kind of difficult experience. Then ask if he'll listen to your story. Read aloud - a lot. And listen to audio books. Have fun!

Penny, perhaps the best thing you could do is just let your son write or not write without your reacting too much to it. Even your positive words of encouragement and praise are a kind of message that he's doing this for you and not for himself. My experience is that positive evaluation, for many if not most kids, is as stifling as negative evaluation. If he wants to write, it should be for his happiness, not yours. -Best wishes, Peter

It is now almost one year since your post. I wonder if you became aware of your stifling your son's writing--not only his teacher? Instead of hovering and stating that anything he writes is accepted ( "Well, you don't need to worry about that any more. I love everything you write!") why not get him a computer with a sound recorder so he can talk or write--as he pleases, and is left to explore, play, be free from any external pressures. You might access my article on creative writing pedagogy in:

Thank you for your reply Fredricka. Well, nearly a year on my son's creative writing is going very well. He was inspired by a h/s group (as per a previous comment) and wanted to bring something to read out. He loved it and did this a few times. He has now dictated three 'books' of a few thousand words each to me. I do encourage him by saying I enjoy his writing. I am aware that praise can be a double-edged sword but he does want to hear it, who wouldn't when someone is reading what they're writing? I know I do. I blog and I love to hear people saying they enjoy what I write. I do absolutely try not to change anything he dictates to me except every now and then when it absolutely doesn't make sense (because he needs to flesh his story out a bit - sometimes he forgets readers can't 'see' the details of the stories that are in his head). When I suggest he learn to type faster so he can be free to write himself he say he wants me to type for him because he enjoys writing with me. I didn't know about that software. I would have thought it would be very freeing for him. I will try and get it. But he's very happy apparently with our present arrangement. I will try and find what you suggest. Thank you again for taking the time to comment :))

Over the last thirty years there has been an inexorable rise in the numbers of "experts" telling people that they mustn't drink, they mustn't smoke, they mustn't eat salt, they mustn't eat Big Macs, and on and on. I'm not American, but the same thing has been happening on both sides of the Atlantic, so it's familiar territory.

You may wonder what these "health" messages have to do with children's creativity.

It is this: The effect of coercing populations to conform to a lifestyle (social engineering, or if you want to be even more specific, eugenics) decreed by people who only look at the physical aspects of life by definition stifles individualism. The drive for conformity, the aversion to risk of any sort turns individuals into sheep. And of course they pass (impose) their narrow world view onto their children, who are discouraged, if not forbidden to do anything risky.

The media has been complicit in this drive for the lowest common denominator with their appetite for salacious and / or doomsday headlines. And of course they have provided the conduit for all the healthist propaganda, the vast majority of which is just that: propaganda. Cherry picked figures, massaged statistics outright lies, and all to support what has now become a massively funded industry which relies on ever more outlandish claims to keep the funding rolling in. You only have to look at the Tobacco Control Industry and the claims they make about "second-hand" smoke (that it is lethal, that it can creep through electrical conduits, that one whiff of it in the outside air will severely compromise your health etc etc) to see that they are desperately trying to keep the gravy train rolling, and they know as soon as they stop making outrageous claims that the funding will dry up. So the press releases get ever wilder. "Experts have found..." is the normal preamble, and then we are regaled with how deadly salt on your french fries is, or how only two glasses of wine a week will give you a heart attack, if you eat one Big Mac a week you are doomed to obesity, anything, as long as it keeps the research grants coming in. It's no wonder that the majority of people are scared to step out of line. The propaganda is relentless.

The solution?

Fire all the "public health experts" or put them back to doing what they should be doing, like inspecting sewers and the like, have a bonfire of all the petty legislation they have lobbied for over the years concerning alcohol, tobacco, foodstuffs etc, and return personal responsibility to the people. Let them make their own decisions about risk. Let them bring up their children as they see fit (as parents did thirty and more years ago), release them from the burden of officialdom ruling their personal lives.

Then you will see their kids starting to discover how to cope with life again. How to play. How to assess and deal with risk, and how to deal with their peers. And with that, their creativity will start to blossom again.

Hi, very interesting article that supports what most of us already know, that schools are not as creative environments as they could be.

I am currently launching a new extra-curricular arts program for high schools that is designed to celebrate and promote student creativity. It is called The Media League.

Our Media League is a competitive creativity league, very much like a sports league, except that instead of celebrating athletic talent and achievement we celebrate creative talent and achievement in organized competition.

The Media League is 100% free. I encourage all teachers and parents to learn more about our program at www.themedialeague.com

"Indeed, the TTCT seems to be the best predictor of lifetime achievement that has yet been invented. It is a better predictor than IQ, high-school grades, or peer judgments of who will achieve the most"

By "lifetime achievement," are you referring only to creative achievement? How is "creative" achievement defined in a consistent way? Kim's meta-analysis in the last endnote seems to suggest that there are problems here. Her last line is this: "the results of the meta-analyses are only as good as the measures of Creative Achievement used in the underlying studies and some researchers have questioned at least some of the measures." http://kkim.wmwikis.net/file/view/Meta-analyses+of+Creative+Achievement.pdf

Hi Stuart,
I'm by no means an expert on the Torrance tests or other measures of creativity. However, the article that I refer to as Reference 4 contains references to a set of studies that purport to show strong correlations between childhood scores on these tests and real-world creative achievement. It looks to me like the the outcome measures were lists of accomplishments that were novel and valued by others. Making a lot of money by working as a banker would not be counted, but creating a new banking system would be counted. According to the reports, this kind of achievement correlated better with Torrance scores than with IQ.
-Peter

1) I've read on here about a lot of programs to help kids rediscover their creative energies -- Waldorf schools being one of them. But are there Waldorf schools for adults, or something similar, and if so, are there AFFORDABLE programs of this type for "the 99%" of us who aren't the kind who can afford weeklong Sedona retreats or $1K health spas, but either free or of moderate cost?

2) To the commenter who wrote about the '80s: I second, third, fourth and ninety-ninth times infinity your opinion that the stuff from the '80s was "totally" creative and downright awesome! Everything from Tron to Mario Bros. (seconding the notion about video games being interactive creativity), Cyndi Lauper to Depeche Mode, and oh, lest we forget Steve Jobs -- 'nuff said there. :-)

3) About Nick Carr's sentiments: Is it possible to reverse the effects of the Internet on the brain or is it a permanent lobotomy? :-(

4) Opinion of the readers: What about "creative" adults who get criticized as "unable to grow up" if they are "caught idling"? People in their late teens, twenties, thirties and above would probably be sectioned for taking off work (or ceasing the job hunt) to move back into mom and dad's house and play dress-up or pretend in their bedrooms all day. Comic Con fanatics, animation enthusiasts, Lady Gaga fans, etc., get met with derision and scorn as being stunted in growth and borderline retarded, told to find a job or do something else constructive that's not normally reserved for children, which is to "play pretend."

Are these people really afflicted with some sort of mental disease, or might they just be experiencing later in life, like the aforementioned Jackson, what might have been robbed of them while young? Myself I am on the fence about it, and that's probably because I'm one of those Peter Pan-like cartoon enthusiasts who just knows I'd be horribly mocked were I to indulge in my "desires." (Not those kind, mind you.) Obviously Walt Disney was not a boy himself when the movie of same name was released, the WB animators not kids either making Bugs, Daffy et. al., or Family Guy whatsisname a "child star" hitting it big with his playtime story about a crass teddy bear. But for those without the luxury of being millionaires with Peter Pan syndrome, should all of us just grow up already or might there be an answer to the "creativity crisis" if people like me can find a way to make it seem "OK" not to grow up just yet?

This makes a lot of sense. I can look back at my own childhood and now understand why I never felt creative and just assumed it was because I was more of a scientist than an artist. I grew up in a very controlling environment with lots of underlying anxiety. Its hard to be creative under those circumstances. Now that I am free from many things I am much more creative, spontaneous, and humorous. My 5 year old finds me funny while my teen rolls her eyes and says, "I don't know you." Its just sad this is becoming the norm rather than the exception.

Now that I homeschool my kids they are becoming even more creative than when they were in a more structured setting. They get their work done but spend lots of time writing books, writing and playing music, drawing, and whatever else they want to learn. They have plenty of productive free time activities to choose from and they spend much less time watching TV because they have better things to do.

I'm an art teacher and I have taught thousands of children in several schools. I deeply resonated with this blog post. As the "special teacher" I am always encouraging the homeroom teachers to allow for unstructured learning time. This is time that teacher allows for kids to solve a basic problem on their own or in groups. In art class we do this all the time. But over the years I have noticed some of my students becoming unhinged at the thought of having to come up with a solution on their own. In short they are unwilling to create with out my approval. So much of this problem I think could be solved if the students were nurtured to explore a problem on their own in unstructured learning environment.

In NZ we have a model of early childhood education called "Playcentre" which recognises at its heart that children learn through play. Sessions are supervised by parent teams - the focus is firmly on child-led learning.. the kids choose what they'd like to do from a whole range of things, e.g. clay, collage, woodwork (with proper hammers, saws and nails - kid size), outdoors, paint, reading, music, dress-up and so on. About 10% of NZ kids go through Playcentre.

Parents are trained in child development, and learn to observe the children, and ask open questions to 'extend' their play and learning.. whilst also learning to keep out of the way!! Longitudinal research shows this helps the kids develop those skills critical to learning and creativity - persistence (which seems related to them choosing when to start and stop an activity without interruption); curiosity; and self-motivation. In all these areas Playcentre kids score highly as they progress through schooling.

As a Playcentre parent, and with my two children now well into school, I am reaping the benefits both to myself personally as a confident and competent parent, fully aware how to support my kids learning (and keeping time for their free play is one of the important means..) and enjoying what amazing, creative young people they are becoming.

The article you've put together really concerns me; the futures of both our country rely heavily on the creativity of today and tomorrow's children - the literature is all there about how and why creativity is at risk as children have less time to 'play' and with it to learn, and critically to 'learn how to learn..' I'd encourage your country to have a good look at what the Playcentre model could offer - it might be one small way to help start reversing this worrying trend. www.playcentre.org.nz will give you a starting point..

Children need to have lots of time for free play, but I also think they need to be introduced to the world and encouraged to play with it creative ways. Sparking an interest in something, then offering an open-ended activity can help encourage creativity, but it can also help build critical thinking skills, and many other life skills, not to mention self esteem.

You repeatedly assume that the US respects non conformity. That is just not true. You are one of the most conformist societies on earth. Totally and utterly conformist. ask two gays who wish to marry. As an outsider who has spent much time in the US I have it say that conformity is the norm... The differences at election time appear so minuscule to the rest of the world yet Democrats Rae treated like Bolsheviks... The only main difference is a parting on the right not the left.

The reason creativity is falling Is more likely down to the fact that education in its truest sense stopped mattering and measurable training for work became the main thrust of schooling. The same has happened here in the UK...

Good article but don't claim things about the US that aren't true. It nullifies your other arguments.

You are right that the US is more conformist than a lot. I mentioned in my other post about body piercings. In parts of Europe, they are a lot more accepting than us on that, and in other parts, they are a lot worse than us.

Allowing immoral or differing sexual practices or not is not a measure of conformity in general. Dress codes, or people forcing help on others, are better measures. You continue the myth that "gay marriage" is even possible. Men and women were cut of the same cloth, separated from a common ancestor, and the goal of marriage is to rejoin the male and female essences. Two men or two women don't have that. They might enjoy each other's company and may deceive themselves into thinking they love each other in a sexual manner, but that does not make a marriage. If they want to start a separate institution that has purposes other than actual marriage, and they want to get legal recognition for it, then so be it. But don't assume false equivalency or step on other people's labels and groups to get where you want. Create gay unions from scratch and model them after nothing else.

Personally, I think the rise of Liberalism has damaged true creativity. They claim to think for themselves, but they all parrot the same things, and anyone who dares to think for themselves and thus differently from the are accused of not thinking for themselves. But you are right that the two parties aren't as different as most think. They were both hijacked by Communists many years ago. When the American Communist Party disbanded, they took over the Democratic Conservative Party and essentially turned it into a Communist Workers Party, though without using that name. The Republicans were the Liberals of the day until the Democratic Party was hijacked. Then instead of left vs. right, it became left vs. far left. So those who fled to the party that was the least left of the two turned it into a more conservative party. But both parties have members who try to hang onto the older ethos of the parties, and so both parties have an internal rift.

I agree that schools have become a training ground for work-related skills. In every state, parents have tried to fight "outcome based education" and it keeps coming back under different names and in different forms. Even "No Child Left Behind" falls int that category. Some mothers wanted to figure out who was really pushing for OBE, and it wasn't the Department of Education. It turned out to be the Department of Labor. So you are not the first to say that schools aren't really here for learning.

You repeatedly assume that the US respects non conformity. That is just not true. You are one of the most conformist societies on earth. Totally and utterly conformist. ask two gays who wish to marry. As an outsider who has spent much time in the US I have it say that conformity is the norm... The differences at election time appear so minuscule to the rest of the world yet Democrats are treated like Bolsheviks... The only main difference is a parting on the right not the left.

The reason creativity is falling Is more likely down to the fact that education in its truest sense stopped mattering and measurable training for work became the main thrust of schooling. The same has happened here in the UK...

Good article but don't claim things about the US that aren't true. It nullifies your other arguments.

1. Uniforms and excessive dress codes. I believe children should be encouraged to be different from an early age and exposed to differences in others. What we see is a zero-tolerance attitude to self-expression. When I went to school over 20 years ago, nose rings, jewelry, and odd outfits were allowed, and very few schools required uniforms. We had dress codes. We were expected to be neat and clean, not wear logos of prohibited products (beer, cigarettes), not wear anything with hate speech, and not wear things related to violence or which could get someone hurt (brass knuckes, excessively long earrings). But we had freedom. Even transgender expression wasn't too big of a deal. But somewhere, the schools began to be run more like police states. Oh, they said it was in part due to bullying. Well, it seems they should let others wear what they want within reason, but discipline the bullies and those who react inappropriately to the personal choices of another. Eliminating bullying by eliminating difference doesn't deal with the problem and only pushes it to later. Why are children attacking adults in their communities? Because the adults are dressed in ways they were never taught were acceptable or because of zero-tolerance bullying policies, so they take out aggression elsewhere.

2. Egaltarianism. Creating equal outcomes does not encourage creativity. If you are going to be rewarded for doing nothing and can just take from others, why work hard or be creative?

3. Anti-intellectualism. We've had that for some time. Intelligent kids have been targets of bullies for ages, yet teachers seem to *want* it to happen, or they would have stopped it ages ago. Kids are afraid to speak up, have the right answers, and express intelligence, since they are afraid of being targeted for those things, when that is the primary reason to go to school. Everyone there has the same chance if they apply themselves. If some student is tired of one student doing all the answering, they should work to learn the material and speak up as well.

4. Political Correctness. In short, that means you get punished for unpopular opinions. It is hard to have good ideas if you are not allowed to have bad ideas. While I don't consider racism and sexism to be good values, some of the most brilliant minds have expressed such values. Look at Henry Ford, William Shockley, and others in history. Or look to more modern people like several well-know comedians that got called out for such behavior. People often confuse free-spirited, spontaneous comments with bigotry in general. There is a whole range of humor I so much want to share, but cannot in most places because of how hostile society has become.

5. Nanny Statism. If Big Brother will take care of you, why bother doing for yourself? Necessity is the mother of all inventions, and new fields of employment were created by people hard on their luck.

6. A weak culture and excessive mothering. Single-parent families are one possible cause here. Fathers often teach integrity, taking risks, and survival. Mothers tend to teach security, safety, and self-preservation. We need both, but rampant promiscuity, bad partners, the breakdown of the family, and related factors create an imbalance here. Now there are gay families, but I haven't thought it out enough to see if that is more of an advantage or disadvantage to creativity, but on the surface, there is a risk kids will miss out on certain values that lead to creativity. I am a utility cyclist and I am 40. Guess what? I cannot go anywhere without people patronizing to me and condescending by telling me to be careful, like they own me or are my mothers. Such comments and treatment are why more people don't take risks. 30 years ago or so, it wasn't like that. Kids had paper routes and bicycles were licensed in a lot of areas, and few harped on and on about safety. Everyone was expected to be careful and mature. Now, people get bent out of shape when they see others being different, taking risks, and so on, because society is so smothering. I believe over-protected parenting should be considered abusive. However, I just read where a woman was arrested for letting her kids play outside. What we need to do as a culture is promote the idea of over-parenting as abuse.

7. Lack of opportunity. As society gets larger, crime increases, and property ownership declines, there are less opportunities for healthy exploration and growth of creativity. I think lots of alone time is good for building creativity and independence.

8. Bigotry against individuality. People have less opportunities to express themselves creatively when there is such bigotry against it. The school dress codes above is only part of it. Corporate culture is bad for creativity and individuality too. When Lynn Conway got some gender-related surgery, guess how IBM reacted in the late 50's or early 60's? They fired her. She later went on to produce VLSI design rules and co-invent the superscalar architecture (used on about every CPU since the Pentium), and she is the head of computer science at MIT. Try working at most places with facial piercings, stretched earlobes, and visible tattoos. Chances are, you won't get hired. This is just bigotry. Such expression is only "unprofessional" because the establishment say it is. If you ask why you cannot wear such things as a motel clerk, you will be told it is because other chains don't allow their employees to do so. Where the notions come from, probably some major creativity killing universities. Of course, the problem is much deeper. Look up "bagel head" in any search engine. Over 90% of the posts in the message boards (unless they are on sites for body modded people) express hatred, hostility, and bigotry towards people who do this. Yet, if the same comments were made about gay people, there would be public outrage.

9. Nosy, critical, and/or controlling people. We need a culture that encourages individuality and self-sufficiency, where people function as independent units alone against the world. Not everything each person does in another person's business. Creativity is best developed away from scrutiny.

OUR EXPERIENCE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM WITH OUR Children, IQ OVER 140, WAS THAT EACH AND EVERY CHARACTERISTIC YOU CITED AS SHOWING A SIGNIFICANT DECLINE EG. VERBAL, EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION, ETC. WERE EXACTLY THE CHARACTERISTICS THE SO CALLED Educators disciplined, punished, penalized, mocked, complained about and discouraged in their classrooms. The majority of educators that currently exist in the public school system believe they are to BREAK the child and rebuild them in an image they find easiest to MANAGE in their classroom and schools, that is: 1_Is Quiet-, Can Sit still for long periods of time, Doesn’t Question, Doesn’t Display Emotion or Disagreement and Will Day in and Day Out Maintain No Expectation of a satisfying learning experience- i.e., is simple enough to go along to get along with them. America is reaping the rewards of allowing the professional educators dictate to us what is best for our children, which we now know is what is in their best interest and in direct conflict with the best interest of our children.

OUR EXPERIENCE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM WITH OUR Children, IQ OVER 140, WAS THAT EACH AND EVERY CHARACTERISTIC YOU CITED AS SHOWING A SIGNIFICANT DECLINE EG. VERBAL, EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION, ETC. WERE EXACTLY THE CHARACTERISTICS THE SO CALLED Educators disciplined, punished, penalized, mocked, complained about and discouraged in their classrooms. The majority of educators that currently exist in the public school system believe they are to BREAK the child and rebuild them in an image they find easiest to MANAGE in their classroom and schools, that is: 1_Is Quiet-, Can Sit still for long periods of time, Doesn’t Question, Doesn’t Display Emotion or Disagreement and Will Day in and Day Out Maintain No Expectation of a satisfying learning experience- i.e., is simple enough to go along to get along with them. America is reaping the rewards of allowing the professional educators dictate to us what is best for our children, which we now know is what is in their best interest and in direct conflict with the best interest of our children.

OUR EXPERIENCE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM WITH OUR Children, IQ OVER 140, WAS THAT EACH AND EVERY CHARACTERISTIC YOU CITED AS SHOWING A SIGNIFICANT DECLINE EG. VERBAL, EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION, ETC. WERE EXACTLY THE CHARACTERISTICS THE SO CALLED Educators disciplined, punished, penalized, mocked, complained about and discouraged in their classrooms. The majority of educators that currently exist in the public school system believe they are to BREAK the child and rebuild them in an image they find easiest to MANAGE in their classroom and schools, that is: 1_Is Quiet-, Can Sit still for long periods of time, Doesn’t Question, Doesn’t Display Emotion or Disagreement and Will Day in and Day Out Maintain No Expectation of a satisfying learning experience- i.e., is simple enough to go along to get along with them. America is reaping the rewards of allowing the professional educators dictate to us what is best for our children, which we now know is what is in their best interest and in direct conflict with the best interest of our children.

There are some great ideas here, but they are diluted by the bulk of the article being an infomercial for the Torrance Test.

I've been trained in the Torrance and I've used it, but I don't think it is the "next best thing to zippers" in finding creative young people. It has its strengths and it's greatest may be in standardizing creativity so it fits in a nice box.

I was hoping for IDEAS. I got a testimonial instead.

I consider being at the top of our game in creativity vastly more important than our standing in math computation compared to Korea or China. As the ambassador from China once remarked, (and I paraphrase): Why would you want to copy us? You create the widgets. All we do is copy them. We do a good job of copying over and over and over, but you do job of creating. That is why we send our young people to the US for advanced schooling.

The lessons of early childhood were the biggest influence on my lifelong ability to access my creativity. I had a brilliant preschool teacher who taught my mom to allow me the freedom to create. Preschool established me as a person of unfettered creative output. In elementary school, when I showed promise as a creator of art and writing, my parents forgot these lessons and stepped in to provide guidance for my output, wanting to help me grow into a financially successful adult, and in the process restricted my freedom to create. These mixed messages resulted in a mental block, so that for a long time, I suffered between having marvelous and interesting ideas and not having the follow-through to realize my visions. Over the years, in searching for the key that would let me access my full creative potential, I found that I could solve problems creatively by fully trusting my ability to do so. In other words, it was a matter of total faith -- in myself and in the power that provides inspiration -- that opened the door and let me access that power as an adult. It was such a powerful proof of self-belief that I decided to fully trust myself in all things creative, and disregard discouraging feedback from others. Trusting myself has led to a transformed life for me as an adult, in terms of my projects and achievements. No one who knows me would disagree that I am a fully realized creative person. I am grateful to my childhood teacher -- and to my parents who briefly listened to her -- because without her I might never have found that path to self-actualization that is so deeply and profoundly satisfying to me today.

I've worked my entire life in a creative field. I've made a comfortable living as a professional artist. I have had my original works performed nationwide. Two of my children have surpassed me by far, are at the peak in their creative fields and are known internationally. If I mentioned their names, and if you are familiar with their fields, you would know who they are. I don't really understand the negativity directed toward me by one poster. I am all about supporting creativity. I've dedicated my life to it.

I have been reading this with great interest, with a slight variation on the idea of the value of creativity in another arena, that of sports. If you talk to coaches of amateur sports, all the way to the collegiate level, you'll hear them lament the change in the way kids are approaching sports and the effect they've seen from the current model. Jackie Parker, Boston University's long-time men's hockey coach, recently lamented in an interview that BU and BC have almost no local talent on their rosters any more. Why not? His answer is that the kids in the Boston area now (and they are not alone) don't play pickup hockey any more. When he was a kid, he recalled, every frozen pond was covered with kids playing pickup all the time...you could drive around Boston and see games going on everywhere. These games had no referees, no parent involvement and involved obstacles not found in indoor rinks (on black ice on a large, open pond, miss the pass and you're chasing the puck a 1/2 mile across the open ice; you learn in that environment not to miss). Kids had to make up the rules, there was always a game aspect to it (so it was fun) and by the time those kids got into high school, they had the enthusiasm and the drive to keep playing the game. And the creativity that the pickup game inspired in them made them better. Today's rising high school kids are burned out by the number of games they play, can not figure out how to play pickup or make up rules (or play without them) and aren't as good in many ways as their counterparts of the '70's and '80's. I also believe that the thing that separates really outstanding athletes from the good ones is the issue of creativity. The ability to visualize in sports, to anticipate and see the playing surface creatively makes less physically gifted players better than those with strength and size. Think Wayne Gretzky, Walter Payton, Tim Linsicum. Watch a slow motion video highlight reel of Walter Payton running and you know that it wasn't just his speed that made him great--he saw things coming before they were near him, he anticipated what the defenders thought he was going to do and did something different. I never heard him talk about it, but can't believe he didn't visualize that, watch film and understand his defenders' mindsets in ways that allowed him to do things they never expected. It's only one place where this phenomenon is hurting kids, but as a coach and parent I see it all the time.

Is the nationalism really necessary? Immediately you single out America as the most inventive country throughout history.
It wasn't that Russia wasn't more scientifically advanced but it wasn't as military advanced as was thought. However, that didn't stop the US military from reverse engineering one the MiG jets.

I believe that creativity is a naturally born talent. Not everyone can be creative and forcing it on people is like getting a more creative child to be a mathematician. There's no harm in teaching it, but don't expect miracles.

In my day the Torrance test was a TV show (yes, a TV show) called Mr Squiggle and as children we played it in our spare time. So maybe the US could show some reruns if they want their kids to be more creative.

It's probably not a simple matter of the structure parents and teachers have their children under is stifling creativity but it's never been encouraged in the first place. The focus has always been on math and literacy skills. Even a gifted artist like me saw art class as an add on.

I'm bothered by people criticising parents for being overprotective of their kids because this is a dangerous world and kids get hurt, get kidnapped or worse. It's foolish to think it will never happen. When I was a kid I lived in a dangerous part of town and wandered around it aimlessly. Anything could have happened to me. I was overprotected too because of my unknown disability, much like I see parents being protective over their non-autistic children today.

All this criticism on videogames too. A video game requires you to constantly think and develop ways to progress through the level, unlock items and defeat the bad guys. It also helps build hand and eye coordination, spatial awareness, patience and memory. I call it brain training.

I've got nephew and nieces and their play isn't structured. I just don't see this 'structure' people are talking about. I live inner city and in school holidays I see kids unaccompanied all over town, even on the bus.

HI, I have a family member that is adhd and dyslexic. He went to a course to become an electrician. He had difficulty learning the formula to put some lights to work. He managed to put the lights to work withought knowing the formula. They considered it wrong as he did not know the formula.

In an more creative school system, they would have realised that this child has an other way of getting the same result.They would have had to analyse how he ended up with the same result. And it would have been a new way to get the same result, maybe less expensive,more efficient.

HI, I have a family member that is adhd and dyslexic. He went to a course to become an electrician. He had difficulty learning the formula to put some lights to work. He managed to put the lights to work withought knowing the formula. They considered it wrong as he did not know the formula.

In an more creative school system, they would have realised that this child has an other way of getting the same result.They would have had to analyse how he ended up with the same result. And it would have been a new way to get the same result, maybe less expensive,more efficient.

I think that creativity is mainly biological, and is based on one's personality. However, the people who I am in constant contact with are mostly all very supportive, and most are relatively creative themselves. Being a junior in high school, from a family of all scientists, I was pleasantly surprised when my mom and sister supported my plan of majoring in design, instead of in biology. I think that people essentially have the same amount of creativity, but with the new technologies and services, everything is taken for granted, and can be done using the simplest methods. This could be a huge factor in why students of all ages are not performing as well on the TTCT.

I recently read another study that was done, speaking to the fact that children lost their creativity when they lost their ability to play. Gone are the days of finding ways to entertain themselves with sticks and one simple box of blocks. Enter "organized play" where adults race their children from one class to another, or from one sport to the next. With an overabundance of these activities children lose the option to be children and just play. Children are losing their ability to communicate with one another, as well, with the advancement of technology. For all those parents who have trouble saying "no" to unruly children with no limits, I think that it is important to note that discipline and manners will not inhibit creativity!

I think this is a cognitive neurology question. What is the root of this problem, cognitively speaking? Coming from Europe, I see clear differences between the way children are raised here in the United States, and in other countries, like Sweden and the Netherlands. Not only do I see differences in the children in regards to imaginative play, but I also see this affect brain development in general. Here are the main causes I can identify:

1. Feminism. With more women returning to the workforce after having children, less women stay home. More and more children attend daycare at a younger age. Research shows that children in daycare experience elevated stress levels throughout the day. Highly structured time hinders introspective play, and in turn, creativity.

2. Consumerism. I also suspect this has to do with the American culture of consumerism, buying on credit and spending which often results in dual income families. People are not used to delays in gratification, this also results in more dual income families and more women returning to the workforce.

3. Organized Activities. American culture is very achievement oriented. Children are dragged from one organized activity to another, this starts at a young age, from little Gym to Storytimes, to swim and sports classes, etc... Rarely do kids stay at home for an entire day without going 'out'. Overscheduling is a serious attack on the nervous system, and again causes stress and leaves little time for introspective play.

4. Fast Paced Media. Children are increasingly more exposed to fast paced media, such as TV, iPads, etc.. TV shows are marketed towards children under 3, and whereas shows like Blues Clues and Dora the Explorer used to try to 'fix' what was wrong with Sesame Street, fast screen changes, flashing images, etc... now they are being rebranded, and animated to a faster pace. All this shortens children's attentions spans, and in turn, the ability to overcome boredom.

5. Decreased playtime outside. Decreased exposure to nature also leads to something that is called 'nature deficit disorder', like ADD and other attention disorders. This does not only affect unstructured playtime and creativity, but also development in general. Children spend more time indoors, and are lacking free playtime outside. The book: Last Child in the Woods, by Richard Louv, is a must-read! It discusses the history and decline of unstructured playtime outside in the Unites States and its main causes.

6. Nutrition. American children in general have very poor eating habits. More and more parents are feeding toddlers out of jars and preprocessed and packaged foods. Even children that are very young, are advised by pediatricians, for example, to switch over to 2% milk with lower fat content, in fear of childhood obesity. From age 0 to 3 the brain needs fat content to grow myelin sheeths, which in turn insulate neurons. The better neurons are insulated, the faster they fire. This is directly linked to brain 'power'. Poor nutrition results in brain 'starvation' and lower neuron connectivity. Also, eating too much sugar has been linked to poor memory formation and learning disorders.

Executive function such as planning, reasoning and abstraction is necessary for creativity. Stress and poor nutrition stand in the way of the brain's potential. Lower attention spans and lack of motivation further inhibit creative thought.

One reason I feel creativity is so important is for happiniess and curiousity as an adult. I had wonderful mentors as I was growing up who were enthusiastic about what they were teaching or reading or doing. No matter how old they were, they always wanted to visit a new place, meet new people or find out how the latest invention worked. That attitude was contagious and still is! I am 60 now and becoming concerned I will not be able to do or see or learn all that I want to in my life time.
I had large amounts of self time as a child, very few toys and many caring adults. My parents especially lived by tne mantra, "What the rest of the world is doing does not matter, this is what you may or may not do." So I developed a confidence to do things however I saw fit, not as the world prescribed. The creativity I nurtured to be myself has served me well.
My children were raised in much the same way. All 5 of them love to create through writing or art or baking. When they are togther (ages 20-32), it is fascinating just to listen to their conversations as there is always a creative topic that emerges. They managed to be creative in spite of the standardized testing,

For children whose household does not provide or encourage the out-of-the box experieces, it will be difficult for creativity to survive within them. I have been a school librarian for several years, mainly with K-5 students. When given an open-ended question, they panic. Only a bubble to be colored in is seen as an acceptable way to answer a question.
While I live in a very rural area, I find the fastest grwoing areas of the country very difficult to visit. Everyone is working so hard to be just like everyone else. The rows and rows of town houses, the very similar single family houses, the shopping malls and plazas, the chain restaurants - all so much the same. From town to town we replicate the same thing over and over. What example is that for the children? The biggest factor in the lack of children's creativity is the lack of creativity in the adults. We have found no other way to score their tests then through the colored in bubble or design their world with other than pre-fabricatd boxes. I praise those who would invest their time to provide educational experiences for the children - not lessons in how to be just like everyone else.

In the UK we have an education system where children are shepherded towards the 'good enough' standard of being 'standard'. The trouble arises when you have a child who is not 'standard', as the the situation arises where you are attempting to fit the proverbial round peg in the square hole.

We made a decision as a family to remove our young children from the 'normal' education system, albeit private schooling in the UK. It has been astonishing how many people feel they can no longer socialise with us or our children as a direct result of our decision. However, in the interests of feeding our children's brains with creative thought, we have persevered with our course, and with astonishing results.

Since July 2012, our 4 and 7 year olds have demonstrated a wider, much more creative approach to all areas of their learning. We still follow broadly the National Curriculum topics, but they have the freedom to ask questions and develop their understanding and more importantly retain the information they have learned. I could write about this at length, but I can only attribute this to the varied learning patterns we use and having the time to absorb information and interpret it mentally.

Although we have a timetable to follow each day, on occasions, the children have been engrossed in a learning activity and have maybe focused on this activity for an hour or so, of their own choice. This is what I think is making the difference - the freedom to take time to consider a whole subject or thought and make sense of it. In school, children are too defined by half hour slots and shameful behaviour of some so called educators. For example, my 7 yr old said recently that she loved being able to do art at home because they were only allowed to use coloured pencils for the whole of the previous school year because the teacher didn't want a mess!!! How can this be?

My personal belief is that teachers should be tested annually to make sure they are still 'in the real world' - learning about new resources and new ways they can make learning creative and fun and more importantly, interesting. In my experience, there are too many teachers treading water with our children, in groups far too big to handle, covering the same old material they have done year after year after year. Life is just not like that, so why do we allow teachers to get away with this?

This is the tip of the iceberg of discussion but at least it's a start....

I´ve been working in German schools over the past 10 years and have been developing with the children in my Chess group a method of learning how to play this game. What i have noticed is how creating this method in conjuction with the children has expanded the size of the group. The children are lively, curious, talkative. A game that usually´demands silence as a prerequisite to concentrate, is played by the children as if it were a playground game at recess. Over 60 children are now part of this group and i find the idea of every child learning how to play Chess in the school not such an absurd idea as i may have thought a couple of years ago. I have no idea how this affects the children in lessons or how it will affect their future. What i am sure of is that they are enjoying playing the game and have learnt to engage in this game on a healthy social level. I see this experience as personally valuable and enlightening and one that has led me be more attuned to `play` as an essiential critical tool into how i view and live my life

Sir Ken Robinson has stated many time "Creativity must be as important as literacy" in education and that's why the British government has hired him to overhaul their education system. We are now educating children for jobs that haven't even been created yet so teaching children "how" to think, not "what" to think is the key! Education in America today is in an appalling state: it's education for thinking INSIDE the box. Too much standardization, too much testing, too much focus on academics too early - what are we doing?!
We've forgotten that the scientists who got us to the moon had play-based Kindergartens, had art music and movement as part of their school day, climbed trees, built forts, organized street games, roamed in fields and learned to problem solve within their peer groups. They were treated as individuals with a unique destiny not cattle to be kept with the herd! Run don't walk to the nearest Waldorf School where the arts-integrated curriculum will enliven your child's education. Where learning times tables is done with a jump rope, learning about the History of Rome involves marching around the campus as a "legionnaire" and learning about the Greeks involves a day on the beach participating in a Greek Pentathlon. What fun!!! :) This is where true life-long learners are made. WALDORF - not new, not experimental, around since 1919 with thousands of schools and graduates changing their world, all over the world!

This study makes me curious about whether hyperactivity rates are actually rising or if especially active behavior that used to be considered normal is seen as extreme compared to this type of creative decrease? The article refers to children being less talkative, emotive, expressive, etc overall, so children who are all of those things could be thought of as "abnormal" right?

Anonymous, I think you've hit the nail on the head here. See my series of posts on ADHD, beginning with this one: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/201007/adhd-and-school-the-problem-assessing-normalcy-in-abnormal-environment
-Peter

I teach a course called "Creative Learning Environments" in an Early Childhood Education college program. Of course, a big focus of the course is creativity. Thank you for sharing this information ~ I will be sharing it with my students!

Dear Dr. Gray,
In preparing my opening remarks for our Youth Art Month Gala ( a presentation of exemplars of our the art of our K-12 students) I was reading old e-mails and came across a reference to an article in Psychology Today. referencing creativity decline in American Children. I often quote the reasons for and the value of, the arts in education - I am usually cheating and carefully selecting parts to quote - because I find that so many well known authors value the arts, but when looking deeply at what they say, I feel it is an apologetic value. For example when referencing increased scores on standardized tests the implication is, to me, that while there is some use at the top of the pile, it encourages the 'lower functioning' students to gain achievement thus raising the overall scores. Perhaps it is a pet peeve of mine where 'manual' arts are suppressed by ignorant educational leaders as belonging to the realm of the "other" students. I hear so many times "We love the arts, crafts and shops because they give those 'other' kids a place to find some satisfaction and it creates a worthwhile diversion for the more studious children. We observe Michelangelo who blended creative thinking and amazing hand work of the highest order, architect Walter Groupius building the Bauhaus to blend arts and architecture and creativity (smashed down by the 3rd Reich), Perhaps Santiago Calatrava, Zaha Hadid and others who are brilliant creative manipulators of physical space, artists, and well rounded human beings, who do not apologize for their interest in hand skills. This list is of course biased towards the arts, but similar lists can be created for other fields as well.
I just began looking at an old book from "Macmillan's Pocket Classics' - George Elliot's Silas Marner, one of a group of books owned by my wife's Grandmother. There is a lengthy introduction by Edward Gulick - a Master of English in the Lawrenceville School, (NJ) published in 1918. The introduction collects time, and events, and authors together to bring the work into context. It also provides a short biographical introduction to Mary Ann Evans, her times, her family, again placing it in a time context of other authors in their youth. He suggests students read the book once for story and again for literary content, form and delivery. He also suggests asking students to creatively provide titles for each chapter.
I saw a similarity to my own classes (I teach a class called Architecture where I have been given the freedom to approach it in any way I wish) where I ask the students to link architects and buildings to time frames - particularly time frames that they can relate to. Their need to find the 'right' time frame, "is this a good time frame?" they ask points to their need for one right answer, a training that makes them successful in other classes. Other students suggested that since their building was contemporary, if they were to relate it to their life experience they had nothing to use as a reference because they were quite young and thus would not be able to provide the 'right answer' again. But, given the freedom, and watching other students take risks with creative solutions, more students are willing to explore nontraditional connections, including music, film and literature. One of the great hurdles for myself as a teacher is to stop for a moment when the answer or response seems 'wrong' and investigate where the response is coming from. There are times when my own expectation of 'right' blinds me from considering the creative solution being developed by the child. Developing and fostering creativity is not a job for the weak.
One last discussion in this rambling letter.
I also design stage sets and work with students to build them for tow productions a year. We no longer have any shop classes in our school district - (that is 'woodworking, metal, auto, plastics technology, and so forth, all of which I have at one time taught) On stage, I work with high school students to construct the stage sets and have noticed an interesting phenomena; I have only a very few boys building, and a lot of girls building. My explanation for this is that while popular media still has gender expectations of man do woman watch, the reality is neither know how to do because neither have had instruction in creative problem solving and failures that come from physical production of objects. Therefore when neither gender knows how to make anything, the boys tend to 'take charge' and without skill fail. that failures is met by the boys by retreating to some other activity with much more basic right and wrong answers - such as running the light board (a technical programing seemingly complex but much simpler because it involves no creative thought or working with unknowns) or the sound board - a similar cognitive experience. The girls, not expecting that they will be capable of success in construction due to sociatial enculturation, fail with grace and when presented with the idea that there is a problem that requires failure as part of the process, adjust, and are more willing to continue. Eventually, they become my best creative problem solvers.
In any case, I guess I am saying in a long way, that my practical experience in education supports your studied research of need for teaching creativity, not as a sideline, not as a way to reach those 'other' kids, but as an essential part of education - of American Education - that builds the creative innovation we need for continued success as a nation.
Thank you

Dear Dr. Gray,
In preparing my opening remarks for our Youth Art Month Gala ( a presentation of exemplars of our the art of our K-12 students) I was reading old e-mails and came across a reference to an article in Psychology Today. referencing creativity decline in American Children. I often quote the reasons for and the value of, the arts in education - I am usually cheating and carefully selecting parts to quote - because I find that so many well known authors value the arts, but when looking deeply at what they say, I feel it is an apologetic value. For example when referencing increased scores on standardized tests the implication is, to me, that while there is some use at the top of the pile, it encourages the 'lower functioning' students to gain achievement thus raising the overall scores. Perhaps it is a pet peeve of mine where 'manual' arts are suppressed by ignorant educational leaders as belonging to the realm of the "other" students. I hear so many times "We love the arts, crafts and shops because they give those 'other' kids a place to find some satisfaction and it creates a worthwhile diversion for the more studious children. We observe Michelangelo who blended creative thinking and amazing hand work of the highest order, architect Walter Groupius building the Bauhaus to blend arts and architecture and creativity (smashed down by the 3rd Reich), Perhaps Santiago Calatrava, Zaha Hadid and others who are brilliant creative manipulators of physical space, artists, and well rounded human beings, who do not apologize for their interest in hand skills. This list is of course biased towards the arts, but similar lists can be created for other fields as well.
I just began looking at an old book from "Macmillan's Pocket Classics' - George Elliot's Silas Marner, one of a group of books owned by my wife's Grandmother. There is a lengthy introduction by Edward Gulick - a Master of English in the Lawrenceville School, (NJ) published in 1918. The introduction collects time, and events, and authors together to bring the work into context. It also provides a short biographical introduction to Mary Ann Evans, her times, her family, again placing it in a time context of other authors in their youth. He suggests students read the book once for story and again for literary content, form and delivery. He also suggests asking students to creatively provide titles for each chapter.
I saw a similarity to my own classes (I teach a class called Architecture where I have been given the freedom to approach it in any way I wish) where I ask the students to link architects and buildings to time frames - particularly time frames that they can relate to. Their need to find the 'right' time frame, "is this a good time frame?" they ask points to their need for one right answer, a training that makes them successful in other classes. Other students suggested that since their building was contemporary, if they were to relate it to their life experience they had nothing to use as a reference because they were quite young and thus would not be able to provide the 'right answer' again. But, given the freedom, and watching other students take risks with creative solutions, more students are willing to explore nontraditional connections, including music, film and literature. One of the great hurdles for myself as a teacher is to stop for a moment when the answer or response seems 'wrong' and investigate where the response is coming from. There are times when my own expectation of 'right' blinds me from considering the creative solution being developed by the child. Developing and fostering creativity is not a job for the weak.
One last discussion in this rambling letter.
I also design stage sets and work with students to build them for tow productions a year. We no longer have any shop classes in our school district - (that is 'woodworking, metal, auto, plastics technology, and so forth, all of which I have at one time taught) On stage, I work with high school students to construct the stage sets and have noticed an interesting phenomena; I have only a very few boys building, and a lot of girls building. My explanation for this is that while popular media still has gender expectations of man do woman watch, the reality is neither know how to do because neither have had instruction in creative problem solving and failures that come from physical production of objects. Therefore when neither gender knows how to make anything, the boys tend to 'take charge' and without skill fail. that failures is met by the boys by retreating to some other activity with much more basic right and wrong answers - such as running the light board (a technical programing seemingly complex but much simpler because it involves no creative thought or working with unknowns) or the sound board - a similar cognitive experience. The girls, not expecting that they will be capable of success in construction due to sociatial enculturation, fail with grace and when presented with the idea that there is a problem that requires failure as part of the process, adjust, and are more willing to continue. Eventually, they become my best creative problem solvers.
In any case, I guess I am saying in a long way, that my practical experience in education supports your studied research of need for teaching creativity, not as a sideline, not as a way to reach those 'other' kids, but as an essential part of education - of American Education - that builds the creative innovation we need for continued success as a nation.
Thank you